Sunday, April 27, 2008

The founder of Greenpeace admits that there’s no scientific evidence that human activity is causing the Earth to heat up; he’s actually advocating increased use of nuclear energy, but his reasoning is still to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (because though it’s not a problem now, it could be). Wow! One must wonder when more of the alarmist ilk will start breaking ranks when it becomes overwhelmingly obvious that Al Gore is a dufus after all.

Here's the thing--I BELIEVE IN CONSERVING AND PROTECTING OUR ENVIRONMENT too, because it's appropriate to be a good steward of the Earth. However, we shouldn't scare people into doing this based on a lie; it's unethical and highly elitist to do so.

Greenpeace founder Patrick Moore says there is no proof global warming is caused by humans, but it is likely enough that the world should turn to nuclear power - a concept tied closely to the underground nuclear testing his former environmental group formed to oppose.

The chemistry of the atmosphere is changing, and there is a high-enough risk that "true believers" like Al Gore are right that world economies need to wean themselves off fossil fuels to reduce greenhouse gases, he said.

"It's like buying fire insurance," Moore said. "We all own fire insurance even though there is a low risk we are going to get into an accident."

The only viable solution is to build hundreds of nuclear power plants over the next century, Moore told the Boise Metro Chamber of Commerce on Wednesday. There isn't enough potential for wind, solar, hydroelectric, and geothermal or other renewable energy sources, he said.

In an interview last year, Mr. Gore expressed his support for corn-based ethanol, but endorsed moving to what he called a “third generation” of so-called cellulosic ethanol production, which is still in laboratory research. “It doesn’t compete with food crops, so it doesn’t put pressure on food prices,” the former vice president told Popular Mechanics magazine.

McCALL -- Near-record snowfall and low spring temperatures are creating ideal conditions at Brundage Mountain Resort. Resort officials announced today that they will be open for a third bonus weekend in May.

The resort is currently closed on weekdays, and had planned this Saturday and Sunday to be the final ski weekend of the season, but that was before 10 inches of fresh powder fell this week. Now, resort managers have decided to be open on May 3rd and 4th.

There is NO SUCH THING AS CONSENSUS IN SCIENCE! Science DOES NOT work like an L.A. street gang.(Google “Galileo” or Google “Darwin” to read about mavericks who resisted the consensus—and were RIGHT!)

This article couldn't be more poignant at pointing out how politics is currently attempting to corrupt science for its own ends; right now, the lie of manmade global warming has become the centerpiece of worldwide climate politics and environmental movements (not climate science). It's surprising to see the AP publishing this rather frank admission, when they have been guilty of propagandizing this issue themselves for years.

Basically, these EPA scientists are saying, through a survey instrument (which they were initially told not to answer), that federal politicians have been trying to coax and intimidate certain results or answers out of the scientists, so that the politicians would be free to scream “consensus science” when confronted with debate and argument over proposed U.S. and U.N. environmental policies—policies that will cost you money and will increase the power of the politicians involved. In the process, many scientists have begun to wake up and realize that they're corrupting an institution that they've been charged with protecting—the unbiased, untainted scientific search for truth.

REAL climate science is currently under attack. Radical political and environmental elements have seized an opportunity in the theory of human-induced climate change—a theory that, regardless of the way it's portrayed by Al Gore and the media, is still not proven beyond scientific doubt. On the contrary, there are many problems

Saturday, April 26, 2008

LOL! Oh please let this happen. I mean, it probably has as much validity as the predictions of us all turning into Pop Tarts due to excessive human-caused global warmth, but I must admit that it would be satisfying to further expose the fear mongers like Al Gore for the frauds they are.

Of course, the results of such a cataclysm wouldn’t be desirable (just as the effects of global warming--if it were real--wouldn't be desirable).

Sunspot activity has not resumed up after hitting an 11-year low in March last year, raising fears that — far from warming — the globe is about to return to an Ice Age, says an Australian-American scientist.

Physicist Phil Chapman, the first native-born Australian to become an astronaut with NASA [he became an American citizen to join up, though he never went into space], said pictures from the U.S. Solar and Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO) showed no spots on the sun.

He said theworld cooled quicklybetween January last year and January this year, by about 0.7 degrees Centigrade.

Okay, so I’ve decided to create another special post series in honor of the weekly deluge of climate fear mongering articles that spew forth across the wires. The title of this series will be “GASP!” Meaning, it’s Chicken Little time again!

In our first official installment of GASP! (first unofficial installment is here and the archives will show that we’ve previously done a thorough job of discussing many apocalyptic articles), it looks like nonexistent global warming is going to send us on a path to world war.

Weird how a problem that’s not real can do that, but the media can just about urge anything into being if they bombard your brain enough each week. Problem is...nobody really believes them on this issue, especially since it hasn’t warmed in 10 years and last winter was a record breaker (and by that I mean—RECORD BREAKING COLD AND SNOW).

Climate change could cause global conflicts as large as the two world wars but lasting for centuries unless the problem is controlled, a leading defence think tank has warned.

The Royal United Services Institute said a tenfold increase in research spending, comparable to the amount spent on the Apollo space programme, will be needed if the world is to avoid the worst effects of changing temperatures.

This is a perfect illustration of the media-induced psychosis that disaster-laded predictions of manmade global warming are perpetrating on the weak-minded. The science, clearly viewed, studied, and digested logically—without sentiment, shows that human-caused global warming or climate change is a non-event, yet we’ve discussed ad infinitum on this blog why the myth of global warming is still being propped up. Money and reputations are at stake; think of all the rich and powerful—the elites and the scientific professionals—who will suffer if the scam is exposed. What will happen to them? What will happen to the climate research grants? Follow the money!

I believe the source of manmade climate change theory started off innocently enough. But somewhere along the way, idiots (meaning mostly politicians and politically connected scientists) grabbed the newborn theories of some climatologists and ran like the Gipper toward the end zone; the snowball effect was in full force, and it has now gained a life of its own. It has become biblical and practically heretical to question.

Remember the “8 glasses of water a day” myth? That was recently exposed as garbage too, but how many of you had your doctor or “someone smart” tell you to drink that much for your health?

How many of you right now are declaring what I say on manmade climate change, AGW, or global warming to be sacrilege? Forget about me and examine yourself internally. On what basis do you dismiss me as denier, cynic, flat-earther, etc.? (Call me realist.) Is it your own determination, or have you decided what you’ve been told by the “consensus” via the media is correct? Do you have the sense that I should be silenced? Drawn-and-quartered? Branded with the Scarlet Letter (i.e., "D" for denier)? Is the time for debate really over? If so, why has it been shut down and by whose authority?

Real science never stops debating (look at all the continual debates in other scientific endeavors—from dinosaur extinctions to sources of life), and yet we’ve been told by “really smart people” that the consensus has deemed scientific debate over; therefore, we’re no longer allowed to dissent, debate, and discuss this shaky issue that seems to beckon for “immediate, critical action.” The very basis of science has been kicked to the curb by politicians, who have found a unique opportunity and will protect the idea (whether it’s real or imagined) vigorously.

All of you with global warming anxiety will just have to deal with it; the elites who are shoving this down your throat need you anxious so that you’ll demand unnecessary governmental action, which gives them (politicians and politically-connected) a toehold to expand the programs (both governmental and scientific) needed to “fight” something that isn’t even real. The scientist needs the grant money to continue earning a buck through research. The politician needs to manage governmental programs, whether the need is real or imagined for those programs, because governmental programs provide a basis for power (and ultimately wealth).

If the collective human consciousness thinks global warming is real then it will be real enough for “the smartest among us” to be granted by us the authority to save the planet using our resources (i.e., taxes). Use your brain! Think! Study it for yourself. Don’t just believe what you’re told—by me or anyone else!

Don’t be like this poor, tree-hugging plastic surgery victim in the news story. Aliens aren’t invading. Bigfoot won’t stomp on you. Y2K did not cause worldwide panic. Bird Flu is not ravaging the countryside. Saccharin is not making tumors inside us. Eight glasses of water per day are unnecessary; please drink when you’re thirsty. Light bulbs won’t save the planet. SUVs aren’t evil. The Earth’s temperature is not out of control. The apocalypse is not at hand.

Now, she says: "We only drive to the grocery store every three weeks. We have our own source of water. We compost and no longer heat every room on the first floor."

Edwards suffers from eco-anxiety, the growing angst experienced by those who can't handle the thought that they — or anyone — are in some way contributing to global warming, species extinction and dwindling natural resources.

She recently launched a blog called "Eco-Anxiety" because she believes environmental dangers should be taken seriously. "This is severely disturbing," she says.

LOL! Yep...so much for global warming, which as I’ve been trying to explain, is about as real as Santa Claus. At least the idea of Santa has some actual value. And this from Canada; remember this Canadian doom piece from the other day? Of course, others from Canada worry about global cooling.

Is it me or does it seem like every time these nutjobs try to hold a media protest event, an antithetical weather anomaly comes in to ruin it?

So much for global warming. Earth Day festivities went ahead despite the blast of frigid weather yesterday.

Vendors and presenters from various eco-friendly groups, including Bullfrog Power, CO2 Reduction Edmonton and the local solar energy society, crammed into a lone tent in Hawrelak Park after a blizzard forced them to abandon their original locations.

All that April snow this weekend was more than surprising -- it was also record-setting.

The flakes that fell across the Vancouver region Friday night and Saturday represent the latest snowfall ever on record.

At its peak, the storm dumped 2.5 cm of snow at the Vancouver International Airport, with 8 cm at Lynn Valley and 30 cm at Mount Seymour. Vancouver Island recorded 6.4 cm of snow at Victoria International Airport by 11 a.m. Saturday -- more than any on an April day since 1940. But the big record dump came in Nanaimo, where the city hadn't seen measurable snow on April 19 since 1947. As of 11 a.m., 24 cm covered the ground at the airport.

Al says the “law must change” when it comes to the climate, and this really gets at the heart of what he’s after. He’s a politician, and politicians need a dire situation—real or imagined—to accumulate power through lawmaking. New laws rarely, if ever, require fewer resources from you—the average American, which means you can plan on opening your wallet up.

LOS ANGELES — Look out, Al Gore ... People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals says you are refusing to face one very "inconvenient truth."

On Monday, the animal rights organization launched the campaign offsetalgore.com (conveniently timed for Earth Day) in an attempt to counter the effects that they say the former vice president's meat-laden diet has on Mother Nature.

While reps for Gore had no comment, Pop Tarts confirmed with people who have worked with the ex-veep that he loves his steak and sausage, plus he was notorious for chowing down on the almost all-meat Atkins diet during his run for president.

And he warns that while individual efforts such as changing to low-energy lightbulbs are important, it is more significant for world leaders to change laws to stop pollution pouring into the atmosphere and affecting the climate.

Mid-April. Still cold. Still winter in too many places. Global warming. BAH! You know the alarmists can’t wait for summer so that they can claim human-induced warming and at least sound less hysterical and stupid. After all, it will be hot outside; it’s easier to convince automatons that there’s global warming when it’s actually warm.

As if we needed proof that Ted Turner was an idiot. Here's one more reason he's a fringe-kook, Che-Guevara-loving leftist. Did you know that global warming will so devastate us that we'll all be eating each other soon (if we live)? LOL!

Not doing it will be catastrophic. We'll be eight degrees hotter in ten, not ten but 30 or 40 years and basically none of the crops will grow. Most of the people will have died and the rest of us will be cannibals.

Angry protesters, riot police, mass demonstrations, arrests for disorderly conduct -- it hasn't exactly been smooth sailing for the Olympic-torch relay. If people are looking for another reason to be pissed at China, how about this: By the time this pyro parade is over, it will have produced about 11 million pounds of carbon emissions.

Let’s see how accurate this hurricane forecast turns out to be; statistically speaking, if they keep saying we’ll have an “above average” cyclone season then they’ll eventually be correct just based on law-of-averages. Notice the safety of the prediction: “above average but not as strong as 2005.” As long as the season isn’t as slow as last year and fails to be as strong as 2005, they’ll be deemed right. So let’s mark it; the prediction is 15 named storms, 8 hurricanes, and 4 hurricanes that are strong (>111 mph).

The fruitcakes will miss the airlines when they're gone and no longer able to shuttle them around to their fruitcake climate speaking engagements (oh, that's right...Al Gore uses a private jet--silly me).

Fear not Airbus, all honest, capitalistic entities are under fire right now, because the fuel of capitalism is oil—plain and simple. Even Al Gore could understand that…uh, never mind. At any rate, all Airbus needs to do is just pretend to care, as other savvy corporations have done.

Many business board rooms have demonstrated smarts and recognize a government-backed, lunatic-supported boondoggle when they see it; they’ve constructed elaborate “green” campaigns to convince everyone—government and consumers—that they’re doing something to save the planet from global warming, which is nonsense. It’s very similar to the campaign by cigarette companies to convince consumers not to smoke; how ridiculous is that?

If one believes that fossil fuel use is warming the Earth (and IT IS NOT) then one must also believe that capitalism can’t exist in its current form, because no fuel or energy is efficient enough to drive the current world economy at the pace needed to continue growth and stave off recessions or depressions.

These “green corporations” are just riding the profiteering wave like everyone else; as I said—manmade climate change equals BOONDOGGLE, and liberals and conservatives are signing on to the BS network. You can play along and rake in some bucks, or you can resist the stupidity like me and be dragged before the new McCarthy hearings—this time for a love of capitalism, not communism.

The aviation industry is being unfairly targeted over climate change and future reductions in aircraft emissions should be based on technological innovation rather than regulation, Airbus chief Tom Enders said Wednesday.

"We think it's a little bit unfair that the aviation sector is singled out for attack by many environmental groups, maybe because we are more visible than other groups," Enders told a media briefing in Auckland.

Change course? Bush has always backed this stupid BS. He’s proving he’s as dumb as his political enemies have claimed. Or maybe he’s really smart and is planning to jump on the profit bandwagon. I saw a commercial the other day with Newt Gingrich backing this tripe (with Nancy Pelosi) and almost swallowed my tongue!

President Bush is poised to change course and announce as early as this week that he wants Congress to pass a bill to combat global warming, and will lay out principles for what that should include.

Specifics of the policy are still being fiercely debated, but Bush administration officials have told Republicans in Congress that they feel pressure to act now because they fear a coming regulatory nightmare. It would be the first time Mr. Bush has called for statutory authority on the subject.

We've seen how GWB has proven he's on the profiteering bandwagon, when it comes to this climate alarmism nonsense. Now, he's proving that he can still beat Al Gore, even at his own scam.

In the very same week that Gore launched a$300 million public relations campaignto convince Americans that "together we can solve the climate crisis," prominent climate alarmist Tom Wigley essentially endorsed President Bush’s approach to global warming while criticizing that of Gore’s co-Nobelist, the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC.

In an article entitled "Dangerous Assumptions" published in Nature on April 3, Wigley writes that the technology challenge presented by the goal of stabilizing atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations "has been seriously underestimated by the IPCC, diverting attention from policies that could directly stimulate technological innovation."

Wigley, even though he is a lead author of the most recent IPCC report, describes that document as relying on "unrealistic" and "unachievable" CO2 emissions scenarios — even for the present decade. For the period 2000-2010, the IPCC assumes that energy and fossil fuel efficiency is increasing.

Remember, follow the dollars. Any time you smell a rat, follow the money trail. Global warming, to me, is the equivalent of an early morning informercial scam; the claims presented in this “theory” are about as ridiculous as most informercial claims and prove that adage often incorrectly tied to P.T. Barnum: “There’s a sucker born every minute.”

Don’t believe me? See below. The insurance companies are upset that they’re going to have to give back money, because “climate change” hasn’t caused the predicted disasters. We’ve seen all about predictions ASS-ociated with manmade global warming. They’re notoriously WRONG.

BANGKOK (Reuters) - Developing countries and environmental groups accused the World Bank on Friday of trying to seize control of the billions of dollars of aid that will be used to tackle climate change in the next four decades.

"The World Bank's foray into climate change has gone down like a lead balloon," Friends of the Earth campaigner Tom Picken said at the end of a major climate change conference in the Thai capital.

Sunday, April 20, 2008

The idea is that polluters should pay for the environmental damage they cause. Slap a tax on carbon, the theory goes, and you will get fewer carbon emissions, more revenue for government and energy independence, all at the same time. No wonder people from both sides of the political divide have come out in support of it.

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Eight protesters who locked themselves to bulldozers at a Duke Energy Corp coal-fired power plant in North Carolina as part of a day of international actions on climate change were arrested on Tuesday, police said.

Melting ocean ice is apparently allowing larger storm surges to flood into the delta in Canada's far north, a change that could have an impact on energy development plans for the region, said Lance Lesack, who has been tracking environmental changes in the region for more than a decade.

I knew this would happen. It's much easier to convince people there is warming when it's warm outside; get thee behind me awful winter...and hurry! Of course, this flies in the face of other predictions that state we're in for a cooling spell.

OSLO (Reuters) - Large-scale solutions to help slow global warming often threaten the very indigenous peoples who are among those hardest hit by a changing climate, the U.N. University said on Wednesday.

Although the cover of the April 21 Time magazine has gotten widespread complaints from the veterans and has been scrutinized by the media, a spokesman from Time offered no apology. The magazine had changed for their decision to use the iconic image of the Iwo Jima flagraising to promote global warming activism.

"TIME has the utmost respect for our nation's veterans and we well understand the power of the iconic image of the raising of the flag over Iwo Jima," Daniel Kile, associate director of public relations at Time, said in an e-mail to the Business & Media Institute (BMI). "We believe this is a respectful use of this symbol of American valor and courage and serves to highlight another great challenge facing our nation."

The magazine's cover replaced removed the flag in the famous photo and replaced it with a tree.

Newsbusters correctly points out that Americans really don't give a crap about this baloney climate change business, especially since it's still snowing in April. People say they support action against global warming because it's the current en vogue, chic, and politically correct thing to do, but in reality, any person with a brain willing to dig for facts will discover it is a fart in the wind.

The League of Conservation Voters, an environmental watchdog group, reports that in the debates in which five Sunday-morning television anchors — George Stephanopoulos, Tim Russert, Wolf Blitzer, Chris Wallace and Bob Schieffer — have participated (17 in total) and in their major interviews with the candidates (176 in total) only eight of the 2,372 questions asked have mentioned global warming or climate change.

That omission is baffling because the environment has become a big issue for Americans. Nearly 6 in 10 people responding to a Pew Research Center poll in January said that protecting the environment and dealing with energy problems should be top priorities.

Floods, wildfires, livestock grazing and roads only make the picture worse. Some studies project the loss of Western trout populations in some regions could be more than 60 percent, and the loss of bull trout could exceed 90 percent by 2050. Salmon will also see a decline, up to 40 percent.

Saturday, April 19, 2008

Juneau's snowfall record for April 17 was buried under more than a half-foot of snow Thursday. The National Weather Service recorded 7.5 inches of snow Thursday at its Juneau International Airport weather station. The record had been only 1.1 inches, received on April 17 in 1948.

Sunday, April 13, 2008

The implications in this article are that climate change is at work again (please read my previous posts on droughts). We can see that there is precedent for drought in this area, and that the drought is loosening. Wouldn't it persist if caused by manmade climate change?

SYDNEY (Reuters) - A key part of Australia's eastern farmlands slipped further into drought in March but record crops were still expected if good rains fell soon, New South Wales Primary Industries Minister Ian Macdonald said on Sunday.

New South Wales, one of Australia's biggest agricultural states, was hit hardest by the country's worst drought in 100 years before rain began falling early this year.

The rain reduced the area of the state in drought to around 40 percent from 99 percent during the worst of the drought in 2002.

Why reinvent the wheel? Newsbusters does a great job of covering much of the global warming nonsense going on in the media, so I turn this post over to them (also because I haven't had a lot of time to vent lately):

In fact, what was once a realistic portrayal of new data released by the World Meteorological Organization suddenly became another hysterical report espousing doom and gloom at the hands of manmade global warming.

It continues. Days after NewsBusters reported that the BBC willingly censored its reporting to fit the agenda of a left-wing environmental activist comes news that reporters at an Australian paper have been forced company-wide to promote climate alarmism by their bosses.

After all, it's not like anyone is going to ask him a tough question, or write something that might expose him as the charlatan most folks not drinking the Kool -- er, I mean Global Warming-Aid understand him to be.

However, that's exactly what happened Friday afternoon when the Global Warmingest-in-Chief spoke at the RSA Conference with specific instructions for no press members to be allowed through the doors of the Moscone Convention Center.

Sunday, April 6, 2008

From now until this hoax is fully exposed, I will highlight media fear pieces that predict the demise or harm of species as a result of "manmade climate change." These pieces will be entitled "Animal Death-Watch." An oft-used media tactic is to pick cute, cuddly looking creatures and show how our modern way of life (i.e., capitalism) is killing them off.

In the past, we've seen stories of polar bears, seals, newts, frogs, and now koalas. And, please review the extensive list of articles that predicted all sorts of extinctions due to global warming. Let's see how many of these critters actually end up harmed, shall we? I predict NONE!

This one is funny, because it depicts the harm first to a plant (eucalyptus trees), the leaves of which form the dietary staple of these lovable little fuzz balls. Aren't plants nourished by CO2, heat, and sunlight? Whatever happened to basic biology and botany? No matter...just stick a few eucalyptus seeds in the Arctic lock box and call it a day.

Notice certain words below in the article on Dr. Molina's "prestigious research" and pontification. We see ALARM, WARNING, IRREVERSIBLE CONSEQUENCES, and WORRISOME. The term Nobel no longer has much weight with me, since they gave one to Al Gore--a complete dufus. This article is a stereotypical climate fear piece, designed to influence the sheep among us for political reasons.

Finally, Dr. Molina really shows his true alarmist tendencies by broaching the subject of hurricanes. NOAA has already debunked the connection to stronger hurricanes and "manmade warming," and if the Earth is still warming (which it isn't) then we should have seen stronger storms than 2005's Katrina over the past few years, even with the oft-used La Nina and El Nino excuses to revise failed climate and hurricane predictions. Heck, 1998 should have brought the worst hurricanes with the "spike" in warming, and it failed to do so.

MIAMI (Reuters) - The Nobel Prize-winning scientist who rang the firstalarmbells over the ozone hole issued awarmingabout climate change on Saturday, saying there could be "almostirreversible consequences" if the Earth warmed 2.5 degrees Celsius (4.5 degrees F) above what it ought to be.

"Things are changing and there's no doubt that it's as a result of human activities," said Mario Molina, a Mexican who shared a Nobel prize in chemistry in 1995 for groundbreaking work on chlorofluorocarbon gases and their threat to the Earth's ozone layer.

"Long before we run out of oil, we will run out of atmosphere," he said.

Molina told a panel discussion on climate change at an annual Inter-American Development Bank meeting in Miami that theincreasingintensity of hurricaneswas among the worrisome changesthat scientists had linked to a rapid global warming trend over the past 30 years.

Friday, April 4, 2008

La Nina is believed by some to have caused this year’s drastic cooling, but this also means one must accept that 1998’s considerable warming (baseline assumed correct) was artificially spiked by El Nino (not AGW). I’m personally not convinced by either “La Nina” or “El Nino.” These unruly siblings of Pacific water temperature antagonism have almost become revisionist excuses to backtrack on failed climate and weather predictions, like the recent “awful hurricane seasons” that failed to materialize (i.e., global warming is being offset by La Nina, and thus, weaker hurricanes). And let’s not forget the failed prediction about the temperature this winter (it was going to be REALLY WARM), remember? And if 1998 has been the warmest, why didn’t we have the “worst” hurricanes that year (instead of the horrible 2005)?

Okay, so they’re reluctantly admitting that global warming ended 10 YEARS AGO! Are you zombie-sheep out there getting that message, which certain groups (media, political elements, scientists with agendas, etc.) are trying desperately to frame in antithetical verbiage (such as espoused throughout most of the article below) that holds on to the global warming farce?

Now, here in this article is another prediction from a so-called “expert.” His prediction is that after La Nina is over, our global temperature will rise back up and surpass 1998’s high; again, that’s if you believe the baseline that marks 1998 as the year containing the highest global mean temperature. So, let’s keep this prediction in mind as we watch time go by. What will you believers do when this prediction fails as so many others have?

Or could it be that all this global warming nonsense has been taking us all for a giant BS ride? Time and truth will cast their verdict. I believe they have already cast their verdict. The temperature HAS NOT surpassed the so-called “high” of 1998 in 10 years; this past year we had a record-shattering winter season, and global temperatures plummeted well below the mean (again, if you believe their baseline—which they just want us to blindly accept as completely unflawed).

And these two articles below are very strange, because just recently we saw this.

This would mean that temperatures have not risen globally since 1998 when El Nino warmed the world.

Aminorityof scientists question whether this means global warming has peaked and argue the Earth has proved more resilient to greenhouse gases than predicted.

But Mr Jarraud insisted this was not the case and noted that 2008 temperatures would still be well above average for the century.

"When you look at climate change you should not look at any particular year," he said. "You should look at trends over a pretty long period and the trend of temperature globally is still very much indicative of warming.

Mr Scaife told the BBC: "What's happened now is that La Nina has come along and depressed temperatures slightly but these changes are very small compared to the long-term climate change signal, and in a few years timewe are confident that the current record temperature of 1998 will be beaten when the La Nina has ended."

The World Meteorological Organisation's secretary-general, Michel Jarraud, said it was likely that La Nina, an abnormal cooling of sea surface temperatures in the Pacific Ocean, would continue into the summer.

If the forecast holds true, global temperatures will not have risen since 1998, prompting some to question climate change theory.